Good question. No, I can’t explain why every black soldier was not executed, but I’m not sure I have to. Perhaps one way to look at it is to ask whether the level of violence was sufficient given the level of rage and the need to send a strong message to the obvious constituencies. I also don’t think there is anything surprising about the fact that some Confederates tried to stop the violence and/or assist wounded USCTs. In the course of my research I’ve found that most of these were written after the war, which raises some interesting questions about interpretation. Here is one account by Col. William Stewart of the 61st Virginia which was written in 1876. The following is from one of the manuscript chapters:

More revealing of political currents in Virginia is the account by William Stewart, who commanded the 61st Virginia Regiment. Stewart almost entirely ignored how Confederates felt upon learning of their colored adversaries. After twelve years the feelings of outrage, fear, and hatred were absent from the few references Stewart made regarding their performance. The black soldiers begged for their lives and “were victims of an uncontrollable terror.” According to Stewart, one cried out that “I nebber pinted a gun at a white man in all my life; dem nasty stinking Yankees” were to blame. The day after the battle, Stewart remembered a “negro between the lines, who had both legs blown off.” “[S]ome of our men managed to shove a cup of water to him, which he drank, and immediately commenced frothing at the mouth, and died in a very short time afterwards.” It is no accident that Stewart selectively conveyed two stories that addressed in a post-emancipation world the desire to maintain antebellum notions of racial hierarchy. Not only were black men not interested in fighting for their freedom, but even after a bloody battle white southerners’ sense of paternalism could still be exercised. Stewart makes no reference to the massacres of black soldiers mentioned in Confederate wartime accounts. Stewart’s account betrays a firm belief in the inferiority and ineffectiveness of black soldiers and the folly on the part of Union officers who believed that black troops could contribute to a successful operation. In addition, Stewart’s decision to close his account with an act of kindness towards a seriously wounded black soldier suggests that he wanted to emphasize the possibility of cooperation between the races at a time when the Conservative Party continued to exercise political control in Virginia. The political climate in the Commonwealth clearly altered how Virginians remembered fighting African-American soldiers at the Crater.

As for Mahone, I’ve read a number of contradictory accounts about what he did or didn’t do to control the violence. To be completely honest, I don’t know what to make of it since a great deal of the accounts are postwar and must be placed within the context of his controversial business and political career.

Thanks for reminding me of Wyatt-Brown and for pointing out the Smith essay. I was not familiar with it. You may be interested in The Social and Cultural Dynamics of Soldiering in Hood’s Texas Brigade by Charles E. Brooks, which appeared a few years back in the Journal of Southern History [Vol. 67, 2001]. He also explores the charivari in analyzing the evolution of this particular unit.

I’ve never really given much thought to this in relation to “amalgamation parades,” but then I’ve never given much thought to the parades themselves before reading about them here.

If a charivari was used to defend traditional mores and enforce the social order, seems like there might be something to it. Anyone else want to weigh in on this?

Thanks so much for the references. I hadn’t thought of tarring and feathering along these lines, but it now seems very relevant to what I am doing. Unfortunately, Wood’s book does not spend much on the cultural history of violence before the time frame of the book. I was hoping it would. Her thesis is that Jim Crow lynchings reflect transitions to modernity and the accompanying threats to the traditional social hierarchy.

Thanks again for taking the time to comment. I hope to hear from you again.

I would have to go back and check. Hey Bill, are you reading?

Your post, especially the discussion of the parade of white and black soldiers, reminded me of older rituals, including charvari, tarring and feathering, etc., which were, in part, intended to regulate behavior in a community. Have you read Susan G. Davis’s Parades and Power. Street Theatre in Nineteenth-Century Philadelphia. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1986 and Dale Cockrell’s Demons of Disorder: Early Blackface Minstrels and Their World. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1997? I have not read Wood’s book yet; does she trace the history of spectacle and violence in American culture?

I appreciate he thoughtful posts and (largely) intelligent discussion that takes place on this site!

I’m not sure I know what you mean by “fodder.” Blacks eagerly sought to join Union ranks at the beginning of the war only to be turned away. And even when they were finally allowed to join they were typically assigned to supportive roles rather than allow them onto the battlefield. At the Crater the Fourth Division (USCT) was initially assigned to lead the attack, but Grant and Meade forced Burnside to revise his plans. There is some evidence to suggest that they were concerned that if something went terribly wrong that it would like the black troops were being sacrificed. If this is what you mean by fodder than there is very little evidence for it.

The more interesting question to ask is how white Union soldiers viewed blacks in the ranks. There has been a great deal written on this topic, including books by Joseph Glatthaar, James McPherson, Chandra Manning, and Reid Mitchell. Black soldiers experienced a great deal of racism at the hands of their white comrades. Many blamed the Fourth Division for the defeat at the Crater.

Have you looked at the battle from the aspect of the north using the Black troops as fodder ? Just a thought.

Dave Tatum

“While there was no major class division between the opponents…”

You might consider the North’s fear of the Slave Aristocracy, its seemingly ever expanding power, and its continuing attempts to restrict what Northerners saw as their personal liberties (i.e. the Gag rule, fugitive slave law, etc.) as class division.